Re: *** SPAM *** This is NOT a complaint (or any other flavour of whining)
On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 15:05:35 -, Andrew Smith wrote: >Rod, you didn't mention the architecture... for now I'll assume i386. > >You also didn't mention if it was an upgrade over a 3.8 or a clean 3.9 >install. I'll assume a 3.9 clean install. > >Double check that you have machdep.allowaperture=2 in /etc/sysctl.conf > >-Andy Sure is i386 and testing snapshots should never be other than a clean install IMHO so I keep a lab-rat for just that purpose. The aperture happens automagically if you answer yes to the X question at install and I checked to see that it had carried out the necessary mod to sysctl.conf. >From the land "down under": Australia. Do we look from up over? Do NOT CC me - I am subscribed to the list. Replies to the sender address will fail except from the list-server.
Re: *** SPAM *** This is NOT a complaint (or any other flavour of whining)
Rod, you didn't mention the architecture... for now I'll assume i386. You also didn't mention if it was an upgrade over a 3.8 or a clean 3.9 install. I'll assume a 3.9 clean install. Double check that you have machdep.allowaperture=2 in /etc/sysctl.conf -Andy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rod.. Whitworth Sent: 07 March 2006 10:01 To: Miscellaneous OBSD Subject: *** SPAM *** This is NOT a complaint (or any other flavour of whining) Quite a bit of my life revolves around doing good firewalls with OpenBSD. I don't do X things very often - I have too little priority time to devote to learning all the gooey tricks. I don't need those things for paid work. Hence I use the XP that I have to have for interoperability tests to look at pix and sometimes to record some Opera or early jazz. Enough of the scenario. Every time I checkout snapshots I exercise all the OS features I use often enough to claim some expertise with + all the packages we often use so that I can report back to the OS guys and to Espie. The 3.9 beta snaps have been the least trouble of any. Not that there were problems earlier but some new things in the past required a bit more careful study. I'd have to say the latest man pages must be getting clearer or else I finally have a clue. Whatever... The very last thing I test (no surprise here) is typing startx at a prompt. That has worked for the last several releases. It doesn't work on the snaps I've tested so far for 3.9. It ain't no showstopper for me as you have guessed but if I am the only one with the problem it isn't a problem. If someone needs a log of what X does I can supply it. The only reason I ever do startx is because I often gobsmack users of other OSes and glorified program loaders by doing an OpenBSD install from CD in about 5 minutes, rebooting and getting httpd up in a minute more and doing startx to prove that we didn't skip the gooey. The times include a "listen or miss it" explanation of disklable selections. I don't know why startx started working a while back or how I found out that it did. If the snaps are supposed to work as they do hit me with a clue. Either way I'm out of here: This is NOT a plea for help. If I want X I'll spend the time but for now it doesn't pay. End of noise! >From the land "down under": Australia. Do we look from up over? Do NOT CC me - I am subscribed to the list. Replies to the sender address will fail except from the list-server.
